of politico magazine. washington journal is next. >> president obama launches a push forc-relations healthcare.gov. republicans will continue to law,tigate the health care holding for hearings today on its rollout. the white house is coming under pressure to hold someone under accountable for the failures. republicans, (202) 585-3881.

democrats, (202) 585-3880. all others, (202) 585-3882. let me begin with the new york times story this morning, considering which heads may roll for the website. the white house is under mounting pressure from democrats and close allies to hold a accountable person botched rollout of president obama's signature domestic achievement and determine who should be fired.

some of those names are familiar to you have have been watching the hearings on capitol hill as some of them have testified about what went wrong with the rollout and to knew what and when there would be problems. we will go outside of washington. we have for the calls inside the beltway. think? you according to the new york times, the president is under mounting pressure from democrats. numbers. the phone

you can also post your comments on facebook.com/c-span and tweet us. times,ng to the new york this is what they say about the president's style when it comes to accountability. obama was unlikely to give in the demands for a public flogging. obama demonstrated a calculated willingness to push people out.

it goes on to list other people who have left before they wanted to and said that that is because the president pushed them out. the article goes on to say that white house officials are well aware that some of their closest longer on message. mark in arizona. republican. good morning.

i have been thinking there has been something missing in the argument here. to me it seems that, as big and as gross as the central in handling health care, which is a very serious matter, that one thing is being lost by the court and the people arguing. for instance, before the constitution was ratified in each state was considered a country and each of the states had a sovereign duty maintain the safety of the people within its jurisdiction. that is gone. that was not discussed, as far as i can tell. judge roberts did not discuss opinion.is

[indiscernible] the fact that health care is big does not make it cumbersome as as the fact that politics is involved. congress has not demonstrated its expertise or a willingness consider what effect obamacare is going to have on the health of this country. host: on twitter -- referring to senator mary landrieu who is up for reelection. been in clarksburg, west virginia. it democrat. you.r: good morning to i will tell you the truth. yeah, you want to fire someone.

the house.get rid of when people don't do their jobs -- you want to fire somebody for not doing their job? these characters who always want to know about benghazi. tell me the truth about iraq. host: robert lambert on twitter. jerry, independent caller. texas. why are we complicating things? infighting. let's sit down and have discussions and work things out. quit pointing fingers. things.he complications

i don't care what happened in in 2013.use we are how are we going to progress? how are we going to move forward if all we're doing is debating? argumentt about the , the formerrt gibbs press secretary to the white in order tog that restore people's trust in , the presidentn has to hold somebody accountable. caller: the only message that sent is that congress is fired. that is the biggest hangup in all of our government. the republicans are definitely holding everything back. it is a big mess. there was not one person or people that can tell you how complicated washington because it is way too complicated.

everything and all we do is argue about it. what about the argument? what about it? what is the resolve? let's quit the arguing. what is the resolve. a couple comments from facebook. tonya in martinsburg, west virginia. independent. caller: hello. i made over 800 phone calls. you can't have an illegal war in iraq if nobody goes to jail. of these wall street people go to jail. the law for the rich is not the

same as the law for the poor and the democrats let the obama administration get away from turning their backs against all bigwigs. nobody went to jail. you go to congress. you american patriots. ef you are poor, you don't hav a leg to stand on. the democrats don't hold their own people accountable. maybe you should get rahm emanuel back and ask him who is retarded now? leckie said to obama supporters nothingwere working for to boost obama. caller.mocratic caller: good morning, america. morning, c-span. somebody is going to get fired because of this website failure. fired, person gets lawmakers have to make sure that fired and theys

don't collect any pension from the government, no free health nothing -- they are supposed to roll into the affordable care act. when you fire somebody, make suck on theey don't taxpayer funds ever again as long as they live. if you want to fire somebody. ray in south dartmouth massachusetts. i think somebody should get fired. obvious.tty i saw a thing were some kids m.i.t. did a thing in 24 and had all kinds of things strained out. don't havew why they the american people doing it, number one. a goodtwo, i think it is thing, i think they have the wrong people running it. i think it will be fine once it takes off. i think that the republicans will say, gee, we should have that this and not ran with

once it goes. mark, melbourne, florida. republican. barackk that obama should fire himself and that is that iy currently work part time and i have health insurance through my job. that is ending at the end of this year because i am on a plan andedical obamacare, the law does not ent tofor that, and i the marketplace site to look for insurance and the premiums are outrageous. this is the worst loss since prohibition. by the way, if you are looking for information about healthcare.gov, they have a new handle from the white house. @healthcaregov.

the white house is sending out updates from this twitter handle . a couple of tweets for you -- if you want to follow along on the latest, you can follow that twitter handle. busyol hill will be investigating the health care law. hearings upur there. 2.are covering one on c-span 10:00 a.m. eastern. the house small business committee is holding a hearing tucking into health care law, the effect of the business act on small roles

employers -- that is at 1:00 p.m. on c-span 3. the president will be giving a speech today at 11:00 a.m. go to c-span.org for more details about that. yesterday, he touted the health care law, encouraging people to website if they were unable to get on before. push by this white house lookeople to take a second at healthcare.gov. here is a little bit of what the president had to say. --p://twitter.com/cspanwj [video clip] [video clip] the law has helped millions of people and there are millions more who stand to be helped. thate said very clearly our poor execution in the first couple of months on the website

clouded the fact that there are a whole bunch of people who stand to benefit. now that the website is working for the vast majority of people, we need to make sure that folks refocus on what is at stake here city -- is the cup has capacity for you or your to have thebe able security of decent health insurance at a reasonable cost through choice and competition on this marketplace and tax credits that you may be eligible for that can save you hundreds of dollars in premium costs month potentially. to -- now that we are getting the technology fixed ande need you to go back take a look at what is actually going on. it can make a difference in your lives and the lives of your families. the president yesterday as onlaunches the second act

healthcare.gov, encouraging people to go to the website and try again. the washington times this -- the president leader and chief on obamacare. -- salesman -- cheerleader in chief for obamacare. democrats and the president are expected to have a coordinated effort in pushing healthcare.gov. --e is a congressman's tweet what do you think about the

rollout of healthcare.gov enter the president fire somebody? betty in albuquerque, new mexico. democrat. thank you for accepting my call. this particular congress that we now -- i believe the th -- hasnd 12 -- 112 title of the greatest do-nothing congress in the history of the united states. they have been held hostage by a small group of people. those group of people refer to as the tea party. they have been led by the most the housepeaker of probably in the nation's history -- mr. john boehner. obama should not fire anyone. the people who should be fired in congress. they have over and over -- over voted to repeal this has already been deemed

the law of the land. useless spending the taxpayers money in the most useless of -- these are the people who should go and they will go come the midterms. president should not fire anybody. tout thisbe proud to program. it will be his legacy. it will be consumer driven. we will hear more and more wonderful stories in the next or so.ths i think the president for coming out and doing what he did yesterday and i hope he thingues to do the same right now through the 25th of december. host: derek in st. louis, missouri. independent. america.ood morning, good morning, everyone. i hope you are all doing well. wanted to say absolutely somebody should be fired. millionooking at $600

of taxpayer money that was spent on this. we have college kids in dorm rooms that built facebook. walmart, best buy, all of these big companies that had their cyber monday. they were dealing with volume like you would not believe on their websites. no issues, no problems at all. we do seem to point fingers a lot, whether you are democrats or republicans. i hope that people can realize brame -- blame those in democrats or republicans congress, you're blaming her neighbors. they were elected by us to us as their constituents. let's get together and work on the issue and fix the problems. the website is such a small thing. the problem we have is the law. it is a bad law.

it may be the law of the land, of thevery was the law land at one time and we got rid of it. laws go away. sometimes we need to fix it. there was a whole generation -- raised onht socialism being bad and being told that communists were out to get them. this is socialized health care. this is what it is. people are falling for it. calling it a single- payer system. it is all ms. -- a mess. you want to get people health insurance? get them jobs. empower the individual. they will get health insurance and live a better life and provide for their children and hope that their children can have a better life. harrisburg, pennsylvania. republican. caller: hi. think obama is a little bit nonchalant about health care.

if we cannot appeal this lot right now, wait until he gets out of office and then appeal law. too many people are suffering. thank you. host: should someone be fired? rose, are you there? daniel, washington, dc. democrat. what do you think? should the president hold somebody accountable and fire someone? i think the people he would fire, he does not have the executive reach to do. this is a republican chief justice that voted -- that had the swing vote. essentially it is insurance reform. he does not have the reach to fire insurance company executives. moderatelydly,

republican health care reform -- it is getting a little bit more insurance for a little but more people. he is trying to exercise measure and judgment to see it follow- through. staying the course and policy is ihis think what he should do. on your point about the politics, that is the headline in the wall street journal. report --

it says later on in the article gavea recent poll republicans a narrow edge on the question of which party voters would like to see control congress -- an abrupt change from democrats having an eight lead.

some of those vulnerable simon it -- senate democrats. speaking of capitol hill and thatn there today, a tweet the agriculture committee chairs members areing going to huddle this morning in an effort to forge a farm bill deal. that comes as budget conferees have been meeting behind closed doors to reach a deal by december 13. the results are is that they are but no one will confirm that on the record. we will be talking about that mcdermott,ith jim the democrat from washington. ready your questions for that congressman. republican of

california, we will talk to him iran nuclear deal and other military issues happening around the world. should someone be fired for the rollout of healthcare.gov? should the president send that message? glenn, lancaster, california. independent. caller: good morning. when did barack obama signed this into law? he signed it into law when he signed the truck driver agreement. i wish he would play that. where he said he was no cain and stuff like that. himself,anged a lot by so he is acting like a king. it is beyond him. he should be fired. valerie jarrett should be fired. people who are here -- this is a tax.

he cannot change tax laws. i wish she would bring that truck driver agreement and when he signed it into law and throughat up immigration and stuff like that. give the american people a voice. the house judiciary committee held a hearing recovered -- we about the president and executive power, republicans siding that he change the health power andy executive that he has done the same on other issues. that,'re interested in you can go to our website c- span.org and you can see it there. we covered that hearing yesterday. that policyying differences don't constitute a constitutional crisis.

that was their opinion of yesterday's hearing. in ohio.to ed republican. caller: good morning. of course people should be fired. from the head of the fish to the bottom. there is a pattern in this whole administration. it is nonstop. denial, denial, deny -- they are --yal to ridiculously that would be the last person he would fire. people keep forgetting all of these little things they slipped in. he is very bright. he came in as a community organizer, he will go out as one. he just changed the role again. we will postpone it until after the midterms. corporations do not have to file

until after the midterms. they just looked it up the other -- or right before thanksgiving. every insurance company -- we be bailing them out -- nonstop throwing money at them. they are throwing money like crazy at connecticut. he had to walk back his lie. this is the worst president in the history of america. my stepdad will not live to see in the history books how bad country was for this and the democrats will never admit how bad this is. host: let me go back to the firing issue. you said from the top down. do you start with kathleen sebelius? of course. just like the irs launch.

the one in the irs -- they all get their money, they all get resigned, they all switch around. they don't fire them. they give them their full day. of course she should be fired. nobody ran this from the get go five years ago. our president -- i am sorry, with respect, i withstood of my him, he is my president -- he never put anybody in there with authority. four years later, it is a mess. guy is arrogant as i have ever seen. he is like a kid when he loses the game. chessboard if he plays chess. host: you and others might be our 9:15 hour

of "washington journal." "politico" is about life and the cabinet and what it is like to serve in the obama cabinet.ation's we will focus on that in our hour of the washington journal. the front page of "usa today."

that is the latest on what happened on the house floor. immigration, let me show you a couple of stories. "washington post." immigration activists are hill to keeppitol the focus on immigration reform. some of those activists include members of congress. in a potential sign of progress,

house speaker john boehner, the of information that -- immigration policy is joining staff. hiredr boehner's office professional for amnesty -- putting talent on the team signals action this year. advocating for comprehensive immigration reform. if you are interested in her and her viewpoints now that she will , goorking for the speaker to our video library. her last appearance on

"washington journal." idea of what influence she might have on the speaker. philadelphia, independent. you for taking my call. i think it should start with jarrett -- she should be fired. i have to comment about the lady who called from new mexico. she said boehner was pathetic. but it was not pathetic when nancy pelosi said we have to we know what is it before we know what is in it. blind loyalists are ruining this country. can i make one more comment about detroit bankruptcy? what is happening there is that the judge is going to allow this change all of the city employee's pensions and health and yet he bailed out gm to

keep those unions intact. all of the voters in detroit should be furious at this. they will lose pensions and health care or will be cut dramatically. hope that people will open their eyes and be furious about this. what do you think? we will go to denver, colorado. democrat. caller: first of all, thank you for letting me get on. went a .5 years without getting any health care -- 8.5 years without getting any health care. in favor ofh obamacare. i think a lot of these excited people are just uneducated. .have printed off the job bill 700 pages. i could read it, decrepit sim. as i am.

in 1996 -- and i have all of the printed papers if anybody wants tookopy -- stephen wiggins out.900,000 [indiscernible] anothercal -- he took $100 million. mcgwire took $52 million. that is what is wrong and that is what will be controlled now. to will need to know it young lady because you are not around then to know this. and you have not gone without health care. and you don't know how people suffer until they do get it. please take that into consideration. by the way, who owns the washington times now? it only had a distribution of 65,000 people. why do you keep referring to the paper? who owns it now? i would like to know that

right now. tell you about showing everybody what is in the papers. thatow you the papers are reading.. it is not an endorsement of any paper. that news is playing out in the different papers. the washington times has one headline. they may say something differently than the washington post or the new york times. doing here. we're what washington is reading. not an endorsement of the papers. mark in clearwater, florida. independent. caller: good morning, america. in 2008, obama came in. a budget deficit. $9.6 trillion deficit. in, america hired democrat congress, senate, president. they stuffed obama down our

throats without any consent from republicans. here we are $17 trillion in debt. benghazi, mexico. people whove the believesnd what obama -- shutting down businesses. these democrats have done enough. harry reid has not passed a budget in this country in six years. where is the outrage there? we have no budget. where's the outrage? we are a country with no budget. you run your household with no budget? they are stealing the money to go back to the campaigns, to a democrats. wake up and look at the democrats -- facts. this guy's a socialist and that is what will be coming. god bless us all. host: former president bill

clinton weighed in on the health care law i while ago, saying that the president should keep his pledge on if you like your you -- insurance you should keep it. was interviewed yesterday and asked about why he made those comments. [video clip] is it because you are setting the way for mrs. clinton to run? our problems with obamacare limited to the website? the answer to the first question is no. first of all, i said nothing about this. not one word until the president himself spoke. it was obvious to me, listening him, that he wanted the feel that hele to had kept his commitment and that understand that he in all of ther policies that were in existence

on the day he signed the health care law. he did not take over the insurance industry. thanxample, today, less 20% of those 11 million policies exist in the individual insurance market even existed when president obama signed the bill. i was trying to be supportive of him. can findhink you anybody in america who has worked harder for his reelection or support of this bill or went his way to explain the bill to the american people more than i did. president bill clinton yesterday with cnn's spanish channel. we are getting your take on whether president obama should send a message and hold somebody failure of for the healthcare.gov. should he fire someone? on foreign policy, a tweet --

he will be up on capitol hill to testify about that. there are headlines about that deal. the financial times this morning. is in chinasident and has met with japanese leaders as well.

dianne feinstein and robert --endez vice president biden meeting on with asian leaders. we are talking about healthcare.gov. it somebody be fired over its failures? pennsylvania. republican. caller: good morning. i feel that the obama care fiasco has been ruining many people.

my son, for instance. 62 years old -- he signed up for security and about two days later he got a letter that he had no more insurance. this is wrong. it is happening to everybody. the insurance companies must be relishing this problem. i think he is wrong and they do that he talks on both sides of his mouth. he tells us one thing and he knows he is going to do something else. i think he has been so unfair to a lot of the american public. i don't think he knows the constitution -- he does not believe in it. i am just so sorry for my son and my other children. i wish they would just -- i judge thatthat passed the final vote really be said that he did it. hayward, california.

it democrat. good morning. this whole conversation is very allculous because first of i don't think nobody should be fired. if anybody should be fired it congress.the they have been doing nothing, for the last four or five years but obstructing and not moving this country forward. the committees have not brought anything to the floor. if anybody should be fired, hb cantor, cruz, and the rest of them. also, c-span, you need to refer to actually daring of these committees that they have of these hearings. they are not solving anything. the questions they ask are and so dumbed down and they sound so unintelligent

and the american people that about voting and not know the issues. the media do not know the issues. pointook for a talking and do not look at the bill yourself. you have not even read the bill and you are sitting there making these comments and you don't know nothing yourself. that is shameful. c-span is part of our tax money on our comcast bill for us to have to sit here and endure this discourse in the country. it is part of the media. the information that you put out , you have no ethics in terms of being informational to the public. host: you can look at our coverage. we cover the hearings, gavel-to- gavel. commentary. the first 45 minutes on the show

archer read the papers, let you ,now what washington is reading follow what is happening in the news on twitter, read your take, go get your outside of washington, get your thoughts on what people are saying here. that is the purpose of our first 45 minutes here. going back overseas, in afghanistan -- this is something we will talk to congressman hunter. something that secretary of state john kerry has been working on with his counterparts nato. the headline this morning is that nato and the united states are warning that it is in peril. we will talk about that later. let's schedule, our last, -- get joel. charlotte, tennessee. independent. caller: good morning.

good morning, america. people new to understand that going to get fired over this. it is harder to fire someone in government than it is to fire someone working at afl -- cio. this is the most complex website gone on to the internet since 1997. these people crying about this stuff -- this is going to work out great. insured.ll be they will not have to worry collect.ing to it is a bunch of baloney. one other thing about duncan hunter. you guys have him on there too much. talk about the guy who talks out of the side of his face. that is the definition of a politician anyway. they all talk out of both sides

of their face. they say what they think that people want to hear and they go and do something else. when are you going to have the president on their? you need to have the president on some time? we have tried. certainly, we have tried to have interviews with the president here on c-span. caller: he does interviews with the corporate news places. but he won't get on there with you guys. i would like to have him on their. anyway, this is going to work out great and i will tell you what, another thing, god takes care of me. that is why i am not scared of anything. my god takes care of me. these people that say they are christians, it is too bad that they are scared of everything. anyway, thank you very much. host: we will continue this conversation over the health- care lie with congressman jim at dermott -- jim mcdermott.

we will be right back. >> friday on c-span, washington journal looks at the mission and role of the national institutes of health. 8:00, allergy and infectious. diseases director.

all with your calls and comments. live on c-span. , betty fordeight knew that she wanted to do something with dance. skits and plays and that led to bennington, vermont where she studied at the school of dance. these are some of her notecards, her spiral mode books where she kept notes. this is her organizer. she carried this with her to vermont, back to grand rapids, off to new york where she graham andh martha work with the powers modeling agency, and then back to grand rapids again. in it you would find a whole of things that you would find in just about any organizer.

brochures on dance costumes, one costume forhes of a one of the dance routines she wanted to put on. here are choreography notes that she made four different dance routines. there is a whole wealth of material in here that talks dance and are for deeply she was involved in it, especially in her early years. >> watch our program on betty ford on c-span.org/first ladies or see it saturday at 7:00 p.m. eastern. our series continues with carter. >> washington journal continues. we want to welcome back to our table congressman jim at mcdermott. weree begin with where we talking to our viewers about

president obama. should he fire somebody about the rollout of the health-care website? i think people ought to and think about every major project that has sector, to the private as well as in the public sector. it is impossible to start something as big as this without problems. boeing or yout can look at microsoft. when they introduce a new operating system. windows 8, windows 6 -- there is always problems. this focusing on the first couple of months on everything work simplyt quite is losing sight of the forest through the trees. i think that the president could in the end make a decision about that -- if there was somebody who is egregious and their behavior that is one thing. if they were doing their best, i see any kind of glitch as

a reason to be fired. you are going to have them. is -- it is impossible to do this perfectly. you were critical of the president's chief of staff and you andunication with others about informing you of on with the law, before it was rolled out. has that improved? guest: tremendously. part of saying it is so they weerstand how they we're -- are feeling. i think they thought they were doing a good job. us that thatr from is not what we think, then they and it has speed done a much better job since. host: did you hear from the chief of staff after you were on show? guest: [laughter] we had a whole conversation about a bunch of things.

he said we will try and he gave me his phone number. now i have his phone number. [laughter] host: you didn't have his number before? guest: you call to the white , i want to talk to somebody. identifying myself as congressman mcdermott gets me up a layer, but it does not who i want tot me talk to. they are reaching out and can.ng as hard as they host: did you hear from the president himself? no.t: have you had any discussion with the president himself? guest: nothing one-on-one with him. the people making those lower and it down is really much more user -- useful to talk to the people who are actually doing it. host: eric cantor accused the and house democrat

flaws of the enrollment. here is what he had to say. [video clip] last week, the obama administration tried to hide another unilateral, one-year obamacare. just like in july, right before holiday,endence day the administration try to hide the one-year delay of the business mandate. president obama and others have tried to hide what they knew problems wellite before the website launched. administration tries to continue to hide problems on the website.of the the administration has tried to hide the security problems that that one official called the website'sr to

launch. the president and house democrats tried to hide for millions of americans would lose the coverage that they liked. the president and house democrats tried to hide for years that many americans will access to the doctors, the pediatricians, and perhaps even the hospitals that they choose. at this point, one has to ask, what else are they hiding? congressman. think they're hiding anything, frankly. i think when you are pushing timehing out for the first , you do not immediately say everything that is wrong. then people will say, -- they work anding to make it they were putting up everything we wereld every day and up to somewhere around 80% or so now. that is from a time when almost nobody could get on. we have had a tremendous

increase. are there still problems? yes. there will still be problems as long as you are implementing peopleng for 40 million -- many of people who are not savvy about how to use a computer, don't have a computer, don't have a place to live. a lot of people why they're are having trouble with the so problem -- i think you just have to accept the problems when you start something big. should congress investigate those problems? i will give you an analogy. the we had the benefit that republicans put in under mr. bush. we did not have an oversight hearing for six months. we let that program get up and roll and you had governor's to the whiters house saying that this thing is a mess and all of the members of from theire hearing mother and father. [indiscernible]

today, this is working rather smoothly. it takes a little bit of a while for people to get used to -- change is hard. everybody wants things to change except for me. i wanted to become the ball on the same for me as it was yesterday. while to get people to the point of feeling with a new way of doing something. i think that is where we are. i think it will go on for a little while. host: let's go to lansing, michigan. democrat. know why would like to mr. mcdermott is pushing this website when it is not secure. i have spent the last 12 years ising sure that my credit not going to be infringed upon not give my deepest,

problems orrity issues to this website. i have also been trying to keep people away from my senior who also receives phone try to trick her into giving her social security number. , if my social security number gets stolen, what are you going to do about it? first of all, i think the and members of congress, republicans or democrats, are interested in giving you security. we look at every glitch and every problem that anybody brings up. if anybody has a problem in my office, i say send me the details so i can look into it. that isnto everything presented to me. the fact is that you have to have -- social security started

in 1935. the first problem i had was numbers -- they had was to everybody.s you have to have some way to track people. if you want to make up a new number, that makes it even more complicated. the fact is that sometimes people still them. website,eak into your they break into your e-mail, things -- but we investigate and when there is a problem, we turn it over to the fbi because we believe that security is very important. nothing is perfect. in this world, you are never safe. think that the government is going to make you 100% safe, time, you do not understand how complicated the world is. we cannot do that. we try every way we can to make it happen. host: here is a tweet --

guest: we are getting the sign right. we already rolled almost 100,000 people. we have another 140,000 people who are in the process in washington state. assumption you cannot do it right is wrong. thomas, louisiana, independent color. caller: congressman, how do you do. i live in bethany. at any rate, with the health- care law -- there are a lot of people that do not understand all of the benefits that they are going to get. they really do not understand and they are just afraid. it is republican congressman

from california that was talking about they are trying to change the patent laws. -- patternstities that small people have put in, they need protection. that is coming up in this next bill. host: action may on that next week on the house floor. guest: i am aware of it and we are looking at it to be sure it does not take away people's rights to create and protect their creations. concept.a fundamental it got put into the constitution at the very beginning. we were going to be an inventive country. people had to have protection that they could make enough money off of inventions to pay for what they have spent. we have been working on that for 200 years and we will keep working. host: comments about the health-

care law. what about the credibility of president obama as he launches a new pr push for the website? it started yesterday and will continue over the next three weeks. been warfare for almost the whole time since the bill was passed. to undercut. we have talked about death panels and everything under the sun. most of which turned out to be baloney, not true. the fact is that we have had a barrage of negative stories, some true and some partially true. some totally false. -- people sitting out there as an ordinary citizen, i do not know how they know what to believe. it depends which channel you turn on the television. you can get one side and turn other side and get another site. that not surprising to me

lots of people have not paid or have not come to understand. when you ask people to you like obamacare? they say no, i hate the government. do like the affordable care act? yes, it is great. my daughter is on my policy until she is 26. and i have a pre-existing condition and i can buy insurance. the benefits and the affordable care act has been disconnected from the bill that president bush. host: -- that the president pushed. host: the president himself referred to it yesterday as obamacare. guest: i try to say affordable care act. it is the same thing. what the propaganda effort has been is to change it so people don't see the benefits connected to what the resident to. -- what the president did. host: the republicans say this

goes beyond the website. john cornyn tweeted this story from the ap. care audit shows health subsidies are vulnerable to fraud. what do you know about this? thet: somebody asked treasury department, i have not had time to read that because i cannot yesterday. cannot yesterday. medicare is subject to fraud. the irs is subject to fraud. you are always subject to fraud. what you do it as you discover things, you develop mechanisms to catch it. that is why i say there are always going to be problems. if it were a perfect system, everyone would plug in their numbers and get health insurance and i would be the end. end.d that would be the it is complicated and there are a lot of places you can monkey with what is going on. if you take 100 people, there are a few in that who will somehow try and get something

that they are not entitled to. this country are honest. that is how we run our system of paying taxes. we filled out our own tax reports and they do not look at everybody's report because most people are doing their best to be honest about what they think they owe and a payout. pay it.hey the focus that the treasury is right saying you need better mechanisms, ok we will get them in. but you have to have hearings and committee meetings. the leadership is not doing that, they are just making pronouncements about the fact that their problems. host: there are hearings today. guest: all of which are intended to tear the bill apart. not to propose changes to fix. i talked to bill frist almost a year ago. he said they should not repeal

it, they should take it and fix it. that has been my position. i don't think the bill is perfect. there are things i do not like. you have to take the time and think through how to fix it and make it work. , the threeings today hearings -- i am going to one. you can watch it on c-span later at the ways and means committee at 10:00. if those hearings were to fix be anotherthat would story. host: kathleen sebelius will be testifying next week before the energy and commerce subcommittee on health care. what do you think she should be asked? would ask her the status of where things are. and what help she needs from the congress, if she needs laws changed. in not the written

usual way where we have all the hearings, using the reconciliation process. a political mover inside congress. there were some things that did not get in and some drafting errors. appearing inusion the courts. all kinds of things that were not quite perfect because -- when it was written. i would be asking her about that. what do you think is the first, second, and third things we should do? why are there no metrics to catch a late how long it takes to correct? guest: i suspect there are people who are smarter on computers who can tell you how long the average -- i think the average now on getting onto the site is a few minutes and seven our. few minutes instead of

an hour. the metrics are getting better. it is not important. it is important that it improve. if it is 29 minutes or 21 minutes, how long it takes you to get your enrolling in the health-care system, is that the most important thing you go the important thing is that you are enrolled in the end. and you have health insurance. host: granite falls, north carolina, republican caller. caller: i want to make a point. i am 78 years old, i have renal failure. every month -- i do dialysis at home every night. medicare and blue cross insurance. since this law is passed, every month i have $250 worth of lab work that medicare won't cover any more. -- that is not the reason i call. i have one question.

--re is all this money medicaid and the subsidies -- coming from to pay these bills? that is what i want to know. these millions of people on medicaid, where's the money coming from? putting this bill together, we had to put a financing package with it. there are some taxes on medical devices and things like that. money from the general treasury that will do that. -- i thinkre is 1 this is really the explanation of what you're asking. we are creating a social system to deal with a society -- with society's problem. we have a fire department because everybody worries about their house burning down. as a society, we pay taxes and taxes go to the fire department. same here. everybody pays into the system through taxes.

it is in the general treasury and we pay out for the health care bill for those people who need it. nonetheless said at home and say i hope i will get sick -- none i hopeit at home and say i will get sick so i can use my insurance. but people want the certainty that if they get sick pay will be able to be taken care of. is what this is about. we are using a variety of .ources to pay for it it would be easier if we had a health tax out there and everyone understood that that was what is going for. we have a wide system of -- scooping up money in various places. one has to remember that i have a responsibility for you as you have a responsibility for me. whenever we get into thinking it is all about me, how am i doing?

do i need that, should i have to pay for somebody's this or that, we lose a sense of community. we want a sense of community that we take care of everybody. host: on your part about obtaining insurance under the aca, gallup has a poll, 1 in 4 uninsured plan to remain that way. 28% say they are more likely to for notgovernment fine having insurance. the percentage planning to pay the fine has changed a little even as the deadline for having insurance draws nearer. took that intoof account. we said people are going to have to get up and understand this program. it is going to take a while for the educational process to work. we will put a small fine on this year of a few dollars. $95.

guest: the next year, the fine goes up. and the next year. there will be increasing pressure to get everybody in. the reason is very simple. to need healthg care at some time or other for something. the idea that i can wait until i am sick and then i will jump in, that means you're a free rider. if you are in an automobile accident, who pays for it? host: was it shortsighted to have a small penalty the first year given the problems we have seen? what if people do not sign up because they sated paoli is $95, i will pay that -- because they say the penalty is $95, i will pay that? guest: that is a political decision. should have been $5,000 or five dollars. we picked 95.

if it was $200, more people would want to get in. you would have had the initial bill coming out with a $500 fine if you don't sign up. jumping up in the air about that. was it the right number, i don't know? host: how did you -- did you come to $95? guest: i have no idea. in, why didn't you fix the bill before you pass the? startede got something in a complicated way when we had republicans totally against us. they would not vote for everything. we used reconciliation to pass the bill. we can alwayshat fix something.

i have never passed a perfect bill. i have been doing this for 40 years and legislatures and in the u.s. congress for 25 years. never a perfect bill. you are always improving into next year. i don't consider that a problem. host: savanna, new york, independent caller. toler: i have been listening this program for a while. i am a disabled veteran. from the iraqi war. insurance is not going to be effective. forced two part-time jobs and has not had insurance -- my wife works to part-time jobs and has not had insurance for five yes. medicaid and for she got through to them the first time. there was a glitch. finally, she got through.

they sent all the paperwork and she sent it back in. she is going to be taken care of. problem with this thing is -- it is not with the law, it is just that all these people in.ing it seems that they forget what president obama inherited. withoutited two wars being paid for. drug plan that was not paid for. lower taxes for the rich that were not paid for. nothing was paid for under bush. the problem here. there was no taxes for these wars. host: we believe that there and have the congressman respond. guest: i could not say it better

myself. when the president comes into office, he promises people he will try to do certain things. but he has to deal with the realities of what he is facing the last person left. he opens the desk drawer and there is all the problems, the deficit that the president found. including a collapsing economy in 2007. he has had enormous problems. in the midst of that, he has by the country back up. we have increasing numbers of people employed and we have a functioning health care plan that is getting off the ground in terms of the launch. when we focus on all the problems, not to see what the president is actually a commission. it is easy to snap your fingers and have people look and not see

what his other hand has been doing. unemployment is down, not all the way down, but it is getting there. basically, the economy is coming back. .e has done a remarkable job i can see things i would have had him do differently or talk more about or whatever. that overall we are in a much better position than we were when george bush left. twitteralthcare.gov's handle the white house has created tweeted this about half hour ago. 00 visits to healthcare.gov yesterday, site stable. what do you make of this? guest: sounds like progress to me. they are getting almost one

million people a day coming in. between now and the first of the year, they are going to have 30 million people coming and looking at the site. will they all enroll? no. will there be problems, yes. host: will they reach the 7 million mark? don't know. when you set a goal, you say i'm going to lose 20 pounds. i said i'm going to lose 20 pounds a bunch of times. and i'm struggling. but i do not take mighy goal away. host: does the law itself function if you do not reach the 7 million mark? thet: if it does not reach 7 million mark, we have to talk about how to finance it. insurance companies are counting on that also. since the president made the decision to bring the insurance

companies in and they wrote tose policies with an eye the fact that a certain number of people would come in, some healthy and some sick, that is how they said the premiums. there will be problems if we do not get the 7 million. that is why i say the problems are not over today. lots of things, but there is no use talking about them. we need to focus on making it work. in, i do notg intend to pay the tax. another says i will pay the fine. with respect to the gentleman who says he is not going to pay it. laws in the society and we disrespect them. people who do not pay their responsibility -- we have no

respect for them whatsoever. somebody who has been told by his doctor that he should not pay it or whatever. i do not know what is going on with that doctor. is that everyone -- no one knows what they're going to need. you do not know, i do not know, people watching this today do not know what they're going to need tomorrow. they do not know what they are owing to need in our -- what they are going to need in an hour. we're looking for the security of the fact that if something bad happens to me, i will be taken care of. that is what we are trying to get people. anything toot worth you, ok. go ahead and live anywhere you want. pay the tax -- pay the penalty. if something happens to you and your bankrupt and they take away your house, i guess you asked for it. i believe people ought to be responsible. i believe individual responsibility is important part.

my responsibility is to take care of myself not only for me, but for my kids. so my kids don't get stuck with my bills. grandmotherhen my came to live with us in the 1950's. there was no medicare, my parents had to pay for bills. medicare took that off the family. seniors can pay for their own bill. they do not have to turn to their children so they can go to the doctor. if we want to return to that kind of stuff -- that is not where i want to go. i want to go where i can be responsible. host: either issue to get your take on his budget negotiations. deadline.er 13 here's is the headline in "the washington post." gop may allow unemployment benefits to last. budgetrs seek a year end deal. would you say yes to a deal that included a laugh to the unemployment benefits? guest: i would have a hard time

voting for that. i don't think so. until i see it all, it is hard to judge. i think unemployment benefits are the bedrock of our civility in the society. andomebody is out of work they are trying to get a job and they're going out there and whatever and they cannot find one, i think they ought to have some money to live on and to pay rent and take care of kids. there are too many children in this country living in cars or in homeless shelters for me to say i'm going to cut off. i'm just going to let unemployment benefits last. host: if the two sides cannot come to an agreement on the budget deal, john boehner will put forth a continuing resolution to keep the government funded and avoid a shutdown. would you vote yes and what other democrats vote yes on a

continuing resolution to keep it funded.-- to keep it guest: there is nobody in the house -- there are very few people who want to go through should in the government down. -- through shutting the government down. if the republicans did not learn how stupid it was and they had to do it twice, i would be surprised. we would go along to keep it rolling. not because we like that as a solution, but shutting the government down is not the way to get something done. host: what is your top budget figure? what you want to see in a deal? guest: there are around $1 trillion. 1.1 trillion dollars. we should close tax loopholes. there is more money out there. they will try to do this with fee increases. i am bored about cutting off medical research. -- i am worried about cutting off medical research. nih is under sequester.

i am hearing this from professors at my university. your grant is approved but you will not get the money until march. how do i keep my staff here, my laboratory operating, for four months? what do i pay my people with? the sequester is a very bad way to cut the budget. you ought to say we are going to do this or that, not cut it across the board. cutting across the board is not a good way. host: we will be focusing on medical research on "washington journal" on friday. our whole show will be with doctors from nih, etc. we will be talking about money and their success rate, etc. friday's "washington journal." bob, kentucky, democratic caller. live in kentucky and i

was watching a new show over the weekend. all the news they were talking -- people were signing up on the health plan. was betterit, it than obamacare. it is a crying shame that people are so naïve and do not understand anything about the health plan. this is a huge undertaking. we have been looking for this to happen for 60 years or 70 euros. finally we have got it but you have the republican party --hting it in the get-go from the get-go. that is all the talk about. other news stations are talking about news. they are all talking about republican -- about obamacare. willthe man a chance, this work. i would like to see everybody have health insurance. i like to call the doctor and get something. i would like the guy next door

who does not have insurance to have the same health care. ?ost: congressman guest: that is the essence of a civil society. what you want for yourself you should want for your neighbor. you will give it to some people you don't like or you don't rank are trying hard enough or whatever. are tryingon't think hard enough or whatever. everybody should have security when they get sick that they will not be bankrupt. the number one cause of bankruptcy in this country are medical bills. with the president's goal was was to take that fear out of people's lives. we have been trying for 70 years to do it. there are all kinds of forces that don't want this to work. the fact is that the american people want it. that is why i think that in the long run this will work. you made a comment where you sit people said i don't like obamacare but i like the health plan -- kentucky has been one of

the signal states in the country. it has a democratic governor who has gone to the legislature and said we have got to make this work. that has worked. you can go 50 miles in any direction and find places where they do not have it. happen, peopleo and kentucky are going to write letters to their sister in with the neighboring state -- in one of the neighboring states and say we have a wonderful health care plan. whyperson is going to say don't we have that, why isn't our government doing now? you will see political changes go on as people who have insurance communicate with those people who do not in other places. on withat is going democratic-controlled states where the wall street journal is reporting this morning that insurance commissioners in republican-led states have agreed to a request from the carriers to allow

extend many insurance plans slated for cancellation. while regulators in democratic states remain divided. guest: you can watch our program today. i read the testimony of our commissioner from washington who will be here on capitol hill. he said we were planning for three years and working with the insurance companies to put these programs together and to suddenly at the last minute say you can throw in a whole another class. you will have two classes, those with the old plan. it would be a nightmare for insurance companies. insurance companies have been working with people to make it work. they are not willing to throw that old on the train. -- throw that all down the drain. in the states where the commissioner said i will let the government do it, it is easy for

them. they don't care about the insurance companies or the people in their state. host: one last phone call, chris, brooklyn, public and -- republican caller. your analogy of the fire department is not good. the people of the city of new york do not pay for fire services of spokane washington or honolulu. we have federalism and we have states. that the governor hated his citizens and allowed inferior health plans for the time he was governor. my question is this the republicans took the house and put you in the minority in 2010. they are set for taking the 2014. in what are you going to do when republicans controlled both houses of congress and they decide which i agree they should to allow private individuals and

private insurance plans and , healthsavings account insurance across state lines. the whole panoply of state market, nonsocialist medicine as part of the login. what will you do? my last question. that the poorlaim and elderly cannot get photo ids for the purposes of voting, how do you expect them to sign up on a website and have access to all this technology for obamacare? about 40u raised different customs. i am not sure which one to talk about. let's take your worst-case scenario. the republicans in 2014 when everything except the presidency -- win everything except the presidency. what you will have is what winston churchill said about us. you can always trust the americans to do the right thing,

only after they have tried everything else. we go in the other direction and throughout the affordable care act and go back to the crazy system we have today, that will not work. the republicans were in charge from 1996 all the way up to the timely w -- the time we won in 2008. they never made a major reform in health care. if you want to go back to that, the laissez-faire, let the devil take -- whatever happens to people is their own problem. to that,nt to go back we may get back to that in 2014. if the voters are not smart enough to say these guys have been holding things up and they out to be thrown out. you have to trust democracy. sometimes -- democracy is like

evolution. you change things and sometimes it goes a wrong way for a while, but it will come back. host: congressman mcdermott, we have to leave it there. thank you. coming up next, we talk with congressman duncan hunter of california. we will focus on the iran nuclear deal. politico's cover story on president obama's cabinet. but first a news outlet. >> the u.s. has stopped shipments out of afghanistan, citing the risk to truckers along the route and pakistan over the recent use of u.s. drones. spokesperson says the order affects outgoing shipments of equipment and goods being sent home for military units at their numbers are reduced. many supplies coming into afghanistan for use by remaining

troops were redirected to alternate routes going through other countries due to previous problems with pakistan. says one of its commanders has been assassinated outside his home in lebanon's capital of beirut. yhey say hussein a lucky -- the say he was killed around midnight and accused is to -- t lakki wasussain al- killed around midnight, accusing israel of killing him. they said he was a high-level commander close to the shade party -- the shiite party's leadership. president obama will speak today calling for an increase in minimum wage. talking about the income gap between the rich and poor at the center for american progress. you can hear the event on c-span radio. a rtweet from bloomberg news,

000 says the u.s. added 215, jobs in november. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. idea fornot get the the "for dummies" series. i wanted to do a beginning book about computers. i inspired myself to do that dealing with people in the magazine editing job i had. being out in the public and talking to people about computers. it was obvious that people wanted to learn more about the material we had available at the time was not doing the job. we had beginner books on how to use computers, but they sucked. -- they werehave condescending and patronizing. the author was arrogant. he said you will never get this

stuff anyway or look at this, this is cool. people wanted to use the computer. publish one book. even then, there was reluctance he with the title when the owner found out they had this book "dos for dummies." cannot cancel that, you offend the reader. fortunately, 5000 copies came off the press. theys going to be 7500 but stopped at a 5000. they figured we will shove this out and it will go away. at the time, not all the books even wanted to have it. waldenbooks said no, we do not want to install our readers. even with just 5000 copies out there, this was before the internet and when we have bookstores that people went into. they came in and it was gone in a week. people wanted it.

it was like a solid and said that is for me, i am a dummy and i want that. than 250are more million "for dummies" books in print and 1800 titles. booktv looks at the history and d'alene, idaho. on c-span3. " continues.journal host: we welcome for the first time congressman mcdermott, republican of california who sits on the armed services committee. doubtless they root, a surge of diplomacy and an outburst of violence -- out of beirut, a urge of diplomacy.

host: i do not think anything has changed. keep enriching, even if they stop short of being able to enrich to a nuclear capability, they will be building up ballistic missiles and their ability to reach further and further and hit southeast europe and the different parts of israel. they stop their enrichment capability, just short of what is permissible under the new deal they will be able to sprint to that in a month or two and armed -- and armed ballistic weapons, which they are still making. i don't think this does anything except give a leg up and some cover in the international community. that is what this is doing. it is not -- we are not going towards a safer world because they are not having to do anything with this deal. until sixen starts

months out. this is not a good deal for the u.s. where the free world. host: what about it don't you like? not do anything. i would make them show us that they have stopped everything. i would open into the iaea, to twoto the russians, international partners. they have to start building centrifuges and spinning them and enriching. with all that is verified, we say ok, we will lower sanctions. you do not lower sanctions first and pray that he ran will do the right thing for once -- pray will do the right thing. they have proved for the last 30 years or four years they do not. it seems like they would be falling. it would be ridiculous to think they will be different this time just because of the last generation -- whenever the last generation they have not been honest. congressman gregory meeks

of new york, a democrat on the foreign affairs committee was on the show yesterday. he is in favor of this deal. i want to show you what he had to say and get your reaction. [video clip] >> when you look at the agreement in its totality and how it is negotiated, with the transparency that has never and where were would be had we not had this, there was nothing to stop iran from continuing to enrich and move toward a nuclear weapon. this agreement stops that. that is significant. in return, we are not removing the sanctions that were based on the run -- that were placed on iran by congress. a billion dollars to $9 billion of relief for humanitarian and medicine purposes. that is miniscule compared to the oil sanctions continue.

iran continues to lose $30 billion or $40 billion. or $9 billion of relief is nothing in comparison to the sanctions in place. host: your thoughts? guest: with all due respects to congressman meeks, the state department said the next step is a continuation of technical discussions. we can tee get the implementation of the agreement. this technical discussions are work through, and then the clock starts. there is no deal right now. iran is having to do absolutely nothing. america and our partners are giving them stuff, relieving sanctions and being nice and making overtures. they have had to do nothing. there is no deal. is still enriching and

building ballistic missiles and the ability to launch nuclear tipped only -- to launch nuclear capability. now,if they stop enriching in two months when there are ayatollah says we want nuclear 5apability, it takes them 1. months together. that is not acceptable. "usa today"ote in that the race to halt the nuclear ambitious iran is reminiscent of america's sprint to help north korea's department of weapons. iran constitutes a greater threat. you say to think of iran as any differently than north korea would be foolish. guest: iran is a much more dangerous foe. north korea has tended to keep it in check. they have russia, south korea. north korea is kept in check by china's ambitions.

does not have that. there is no check on iran. there is no india-pakistan check. iran has no check but the u.s. and the sanctions. there is no country besides israel in a community that has or will have the thinking ability. that is why iran is -- to be frank, with iran's government driven by radical extremist muslims, that is different from a self-preservation mindset that north korea has. the old soviet model, that is different from iran's government. the iranians are still sponsoring terrorism, syria, ir aq, all over. these sanctions do nothing towards that. iran has not changed and there is no check. they are more dangerous. for you blow yourself up

your god, that makes you more dangerous than self-preservation in most countries. honest in wanting to stay alive, i don't think have that.ns a lot of folks in afghanistan and iraq do not blowing themselves up and strapping bombs on kids, that is who you're dealing with with iran. they're not rational actors. host: congressman, after the he quit his attack, job and joined the marine corps and served in iraq. guest: twice. host: where? fallujah in 2004 in afghanistan in 2007. host: is where with -- is war with iran inevitable? guest: i hope not.

a ground war in iran would be horrible. people like to toss around the fact that we have to stop them from getting this nuclear capability. i don't think it is inevitable, but if you have to hit iran you deal with technical -- titus gold nuclear devices and that the back a decade -- if you have to hit iran, you do it with tactical nuclear devices and set them back a decade. or with an air campaign. think america knows its limitations in that area and what we can do. we want to spend 20 years thereafter we tear it down to so it is not run by a to radical leader like has happened in iraq and afghanistan. you have some crazy guys rented governments. what we have done to set that up has played a role in those countries not being great actors. host: congressional action on

this. john kerry and the white house have asked congress not to go ahead and vote on a new round of sanctions against iran. secretary of state will testify next week before the foreign affairs committee. will congress wait until after he testifies? guest: congress should not wait. what you have in this administration and the bubble that exists, they are in love with the idea of saying that they did something. whether it works or not, they are blind to reality. we should proceed with sanctions, let the iranians know this is not un-american deal, this is a kerry-obama deal. and that the rest of congress is not behind them. the u.s. senate want to impose sanctions. this will be hard for them to say we are going to trust iran and hope they do the right thing for the first time in 40 years. host: william is up first in ohio, democratic caller.

theer: congressman, evidence that world trade center building 7 was wrought down with explosives is real and proven. how much more trust does congress have to lose before it faces reality and acknowledges the need for a new investigation into building 7's destruction? guest: i don't think you need investigation. the way that those towers were brought down was by radical islamic terrorists. her investigation has show that. host: did you read the 9/11 investigation? guest: i did not. host: you think it was adequate. lake placid, florida. caller: good morning. ira member in the past, -- i whenber in the past president clinton was dealing with china. they had a problem with missiles and their guidance systems.

clinton. deals with it appeared that clinton gave them a guidance system for their cbm's and they were able to launch their icbm's. . with accuracy. it was not long after that, a few months after that, the minister of war was threatening the u.s. over taiwan. have got to remember, when madeleine albright went to north with theirealt over nucleart time and was supposedly -- they wanted uranium for a nuclear power plant. they took that uranium and refined and made into a nuclear weapon.

they also got missile systems from china. i do not trust this administration dealing with iran at all. i think we will come out on the losing end. host: cumbersome? -- congressman? guest: i agree. all the things i have said, he said the same thing. host: tweeting in. why don't you lower the sanctions first as a jester, you can put them back? -- as a gesture, you can put them back? guest: once you let the monkeys out of the barrel -- you are having the wrong getting into a pack. we are going to reward you for being bad. if you raise kids or anything like that, you do not reword that behavior. why do anything when behavior has been that. i do not understand the logic.

it seems like a folly to believe will act differently than it has ever acted before in the last 40 years. thatis silly to belief they are going to change all of the sudden just because. host: the new round of sanctions -- guest: we have to deal with the world the way it is. the iranians are bad actors, we should proceed with that in mind . we have been burned. if you go back during the cold war, we have been burned by trusting that the people that we are negotiating with our negotiating in good faith like we are. not everybody is america. not everybody has honesty and integrity, transparency that we have. whether you talk about the city union, china, north korea. union,t the soviet china, north korea. we trust that do not verify. tot: is the u.s. repaired

lead by example and destroy its refinement? guest: why? we are not a sponsor of terrorism. iran is. caller: kristen, -- host: kristen, oklahoma. caller: first of all, i cannot believe that this gentleman, who was lied to when he went to iraq, is not more upset about bush and his administration of our and killing 2,300 soldiers. spending trillions of dollars and bankrupting us. also, think about the thousands of soldiers coming back maimed. this guy wants to talk about let's not give peace a chance. talk to your buddy issa and find out why the bush administration sent you over there without the proper body armor meant -- proper body armor.

look at what the republicans had done to the middle east in the last 10 years. another thing, like my brother said the other day, you always say israel is our closest ally. how many israeli soldiers died in the afghanistan war? how many israeli soldiers died when we were over there -- you are over there fighting in iraq? we talk about israel this, israel that. not join our coalition. you're making fun of president obama, he cannot have anybody follow or get in the coalition. israel should have been the first ones with the coalition. we do noth israel, want them in our coalition. there are some problems between israel and palestine. it would make things more complex and we would not have been able to get a lot of our partners and allies that we got

in iraq and afghanistan if israel had been part of that. they understand that. israel helped us with intelligence and other things. putting them in the coalition and having is really big on the ground in these countries -- putting them in this coalition and having israeli boots on the ground would have done more harm in these countries. president bush did not kill any soldiers, islamic terrorists did. we went to iraq for the right reasons. assad has usedt these chemical weapons that iraq had. they went straight to syria, ass ad has had been sent. we went in there for the right reasons. we underestimated what we needed to do after the initial attack. over the entire country, what it would take to build it again. i did two tours in iraq.

a lot of memory and brothers lost their lives or québec would it -- a lot of my marine brothers lost their lives or came back wounded. because of this president, we do not have a military presence in iraq. iran is unchecked, syria is unchecked, the 10 years we have we do not have- anything to show for it. this president wandered what our military did for 10 long years. host: i want to get your thoughts on the impact the deal might have on peace in the middle east. "the washington post" has a piece that says turkey, a backer joineda's weapons has ally, andd's calling for a peace conference. is that a positive outcome of the deal? guest: sure, i don't think it is

an outcome of the deal. i don't think turkey when he ran to have a nuclear weapon. the nations are going to believe this and maybe they truly believe iran has changed and they are fun to be good from now on. they are hoping they do that so they don't have a nuclear neighbor. i don't think any of these nations when nuclear nations. goes nuclear and saudi arabia and a lot of gulf states go nuclear, they are going to have a nuclear middle east. take how combustible it is now, pre-nuclearization. think of all these nations that had infighting and all the civil wars and strife going on. give them all nuclear weapons, that is what is going to happen if iran gets a nuke. these other nations will not have one while they don't. a nuclear middle east is not safe for anyone.

that cannot be allowed to happen. host: that answers this tweet. it sounds like he is saying congress does not want peace in the middle east or with iran. guest: you have to be a realist. it is not about wanting peace will stops because the u.s. wants peace, does that mean that he's happens. -- does not mean that he's happens. you have to take iran for what they are and how bad they have acted. are they going to change does like that or keep doing what they have been doing? if they get a nuclear weapon, every country in the area will have a nuclear weapon. the question comes -- how far do you let them enrich? allows them to enrich uranium to a point. it only takes a few months to go from that point to nuclearization. if that is where you want to have -- where iran is two months away from having a nuclear

weapon, if that makes everyone happy, that is scary. host: "the washington post" writes sunni arab states do not object to a deal, but they worry about warming ties between tehran and washington. the big worry is that a long- term deal normalizing ties between iran and the u.s. will come at the expense of sunni influence. explain this a little. guest: this administration likes to make friends with our past foes and ignore our allies. this plays into the. not being theile greatest country in the world, women cannot vote and drive, people still get t stoned. security wise, they have been allies and have stopped a lot of bad things to happening to sharing citizens by

intelligence. this administration likes to go out and meet our allies on the side like they have done with egypt and saudi arabia in great britain and dollars. and like to go to our foes say let's appease you. that is how we are going to work. saudi arabia does not want a nuclear iran. dubai,f the gulf states, abu dhabi. the last thing they want is for iran to have nuclear weapons. capitalism and the free market , freestern civilization elections, women can run for office in jordan and dubai, abu dhabi. these are westernized states. the last thing that they want for their burgeoning economies is to be destabilized by a nuclear iran. if you want to look to peace in the middle east, look to good

actors that are doing great things. they are bringing in reforms as fast as they can. reward them, do not reward the bad guys to say they want to wipe iran off the face of the earth. host: iowa, independent caller. caller: i am honored to stick with you. i have a problem with -- in the manner that we are negotiating with these people, it is in a secular way. i do not think a lot of people ,nderstand that the iranians their negotiations are in a radical, religious way. a lot of people do not understand that to them it is honorable and heroic to successfully lie and deceive the thedel, which is us, and zionist, which is the israelis. we are naïve to think that they do not believe -- that they do

not understand what they are doing is actually deceiving us. and totally -- their whole idea through their religion is to destroy us. host: we will have you respond to that. negotiating in a religious way? guest: he is right to a great extent. we arenians have said the great evil and they're going to wipe israel off the face of the earth. in the middle eastern culture, it is looked upon with high regard to get the best deal possible no matter what it takes, that includes lying. that is one reason the gulf states like to work with the u.s., because we are honest and transparent. they like doing business with us as opposed to their partners or even the communist chinese. they like doing business with people that are honest and transparent.

that is an underpinning to these negotiations. once again, if you are willing to blow yourself up and commit suicide in order to blow up other people, you are not a rational person. up other people, you are not a rational person. that is to you are dealing with when you are dealing with uranian's. host: -- iranians. host: you are saying that all middle eastern countries are this way? part of the middle eastern culture to get the best deal that you can, whether you are in the marketplace, haggling over a deal, yes, this is part of the middle eastern culture. try going into a store here and try to barter for your food, but they still do that in the middle east. the shop owner will say whatever he or she has to to sell something. people barter back and forth and try to get the best deal for each other. iran is the epitome of that, they have lied over and over.

they are liars. the arabian government run -- lies all the time. why trust them now? i ask, why trust them now? host: are you speaking from personal experience? guest: i know this is a big generalization, they do business different than we do business in the west. they have markets, they like to barter, they like to do whatever they can, say whatever they can to get the best deal. a reminder -- host: for our viewers, the congressmen served two tours in iraq and he might be a familiar face or name named after his father, duncan hunter, who retired after 14 consecutive terms. if i could, karzai has the same problem. he is a little bit crazy, is not

trustworthy, tries to get the best deal for himself -- not necessarily for his people, but for himself. not aneceptive and honest broker. you see that off and on in these backroom middle eastern countries more than you do anywhere else. host: leading us to the headlines today in the paper about the afghanistan deal that john kerry is trying to negotiate along with nato, getting karzai to sign it. the headline in "the washington post ," is that it is in peril. it has been in peril the whole time. it is going to hurt the international community's help afghanistan. people will not invest billions of dollars if they do not know where the money is going, if it is just going into the corrupt pockets of an afghan official. i do not know what the problem of karzai is.

i truly do not. for all the help, the money, the lives that the international community has given to make themselves safer because afghanistan was the hot spot of international terrorist the pakistan with its nuclear capability, clearly it is a dangerous place, for all the stuff we have done for karzai, he just seems a bit unhinged to me. once again, it is hard to negotiate with someone who can be a little bit crazy, and i think that is karzai's problem. i do not understand how it benefits him to not get the international aid and international support to build up his country that he has been offered in a free or more westernized way. there is no upside for him except that he gets to keep his kind of dominant hold on the afghan population. host: we have this e-mail --

guest: sure, and there was an uprising from within a few years ago in a run. unfortunately this administration did not do anything to help it. we let it die down. killed,ian's were hundreds of iranian regular people, students and people who were protesting, that was a protest not against american sanctions, but against the heavy handedness of the uranian government. this is not a free country that we are talking about here. host: tracy, minneapolis, you are on the air. go ahead. all due respect, mr. hunter, it sounds like you want to wipe iran off the face of the earth. you talked about having a nuclear free middle east except israel. i think that is an agitating double standard that is tossing a lot of problems. maybe we should get rid of

israel's nuclear weapons first and start from there. that is my opinion, but that is not exactly why i am calling. i noticed that a lot of these countries decide to sell their oil in other currencies and get off the petrodollar, this is the immediate drumroll of they are terrorists, rogue states. i could be wrong, tell me why i'm wrong. it just seems really common to me to see that, to see the exchange of oil, you immediately go in there, we bomb and take over with the central government and get back on the central dollar -- petrodollar. i do not understand the last part of your question, sorry. you say that when countries try to get off oil production, america goes in and sets them back up? >> instead of selling oil in another currency rather than u.s. dollars, then the united states has an issue with it, that is what i got from it. >> i

have no idea. when it comes to israel, israel has not threatened anyone. they do not say they are going to threaten anyone by wiping them off the face of the earth, no suicide bombings, they have not tried to attack americans on american soil. iran has done all of these things. israel has not done any of these things. you cannot look at germany, the united there'll -- united states, france, israel, many of these free, transparent western democracies and compare us with iran. it does not work that way and i do not work that way. you have good actors and bad actors and you can see by people's actions over and over again if they are good people or bad people, good nations are bad nations. you have to be a realist and say -- we are not all the same, there are good countries and there are bad countries. once again, if iran came forward and said they were going to stop

at all today, no more centrifuges spinning, you can come in and look at every single thing that we have, we will be totally open, totally transparent, that is fantastic. that is the greatest thing in the world and everyone would be happy to see that, but that is not what is happening here. i would say to the people watching, do not the confused with what the administration would like you to believe about it. deal and the reality of they are not giving up nuclear reactors, they are not opening up their country and saying come on in, we will prove to you we are not trying to make nuclear weapons -- they are not doing that at all. once again, why think that the bad actor has suddenly become a good actor just because you are relieving sanctions? host: you have this twitter message -- host: and in e-mail from missouri --

guest: sure, so the last thing first, it is not just in the united states best interest that iran does not develop nuclear capability, it is the entire world and the middle east. it is in everyone's interest, not just the united states. to say that the united states is -- foror trying to have not trying to have a destabilized, radical islam is nation not have nuclear weapons, and that we have to give something up for that to happen? that is silly. we are about to ask or tell bad states that you do not get to have nuclear weapons? maybe people are so far removed

from what nuclear capability really means and the massive devastation and the structure and. into myackpack district, what would it do to the economy? the united states, security wise? this is a real threat, no matter how science fiction it feels to think about that happening, it could easily happen and it is our job to stop it. host: we have this tweet from calamity jane -- host: what do you say to that argument? syria rightis in now as a proxy terrorist. they are in all of these places doing bad things. they are in afghanistan. they have not invaded because that is not what these countries do. what these countries -- by these countries i mean countries like , they have proxy

terrorists. they fund, promote, and train bad actors in their state and then send them out to other countries to destabilize. front page this morning of "the new york times." "jihadist groups gain turmoil across the middle east, planning violence to present new opportunities for jihadist groups across the middle east to raise concerns among american intelligence and counterterrorism officials that militants aligned with al qaeda could establish a base in syria capable of threatening israel and europe. -- europe." guest: that is absolutely true, especially in syria. you have a line from syria to iraq. that is how they get a lot of their weapons and their fighters. there is nohim -- american military presence in iraq now. al qaeda in iraq has now moved

into syria. they do have spots where there is no threat to them whatsoever and they are setting up, basically, al qaeda training grounds like we had in afghanistan. there is no way for us to go in there and stop them, no way for becauseuntries to go in of the civil war in syria. it is the lawlessness in iraq. that is why if you go back to the iraqi security agreement that never got done, it was a lot more important -- important than people realized, you would not have that line going between iran and syria. you would have a check on the operatives there. go to john, next, great neck, new york. you are on the air. go ahead. caller: i am listening to the astounding, misleading statements, misconceptions, falsehoods that this congressman is spouting and i hardly know where to begin to comment. let's take the iraqi invasion,

to begin with. he said it was the right thing and that we did the right thing by invading. first of all, we went in there under the concept that iraqi at weapons of mass destruction, which was proven to be false. when that was proven to be false, the republicans turned around and said that we were bringing the iraqis democracy. i do not ever recall the iraqis asking us to bring them democracy. let's go to -- god, i am just astounded by the comments this man is making. let's talk about the middle east overall. he sat there and called middle easterners liars in their negotiations. what about the fact that -- he talks about iran supporting other organizations in the middle east. does he not call the invasion of support of the invasion of

the middle east? let's get the response. number one, we thought that there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq. i think that what has been proven is that syria got a rax weapons of mass destruction. it is not talked about a lot, people do not like to admit that bush was right, cheney was right, the international intelligence committee was right and that those weapons of mass destruction, those terrible -- horrible gases that assad has used on his own people, a lot of that came from iraq. we just did not get it in time. number two, the uranian's do deceive, they do live, they have shown that over and over again. they still have an american hostage. you have been doing a lot of bad things and once again, i do not understand why you want to put

faith in a country that has shown over and over again that they will live, they will deceive, they will do anything for all people and promote terrorism to get what they want. host: i want to get your take on another story in the papers today, joe biden meeting with asian papers today, the headline saying that his move raises tensions, that he is critical of the air defenses own, trying to leave room for talks. tell us about what is going on here and what your take on it is. guest: the chinese administration has told our thetary tour -- to ignore commercial airliner that you are flying in on that you have to take into account, responding to the chinese -- i am not sure exactly how it works. is notitary side recognizing it. china is going to try to put themselves in the south china sea, exhorting themselves over

japan and our allies in that region and i think we need to stop it. we have been talking about china since i have been in congress, wanting to expand, and that is what is happening right now. i think they will push a little bit further and a little bit further every time. once again, this is much harder than the iran deal. china is a huge part of our economy and they are becoming more westernized and more capitalistic aisle at the same time building their military up in a way where it is purely targeted at the american military. in aing their military up protective way against everybody , but also specific weapons systems to take out american military power. host: how should the united states respond? guest: by not recognizing it. which is what they have done up to this point.

i think that is the right thing. the front page of "the financial times" this morning. ties, warningsse from two senators. feinstein, ir believe, she is the chairman of the intel committee in the senate? meaning she knows all the bad things the chinese are doing to our systems. water, the electrical grid, our military systems -- not to say that the chinese have hacked into thousands of businesses around the nation trying to steal ideas. that is not just being done by rogue communist chinese agents, that is being done by the chinese government. chinese company that does telecommunications is going to install the actual backbone for

the south korea telecommunications network, that should be a scary thing for south korea and the united states, because we need security there to. as long as we are there helping them against north korea, there should be safety and how they choose to do their telecommunications. there are a lot of countries, european countries, the united states has the ability to do this, and other asian companies as well. on with, what is going the asia-pacific region right now and our relationship with asian countries? like anything, when you push out more and more, you will encounter more and more that you did not know before. that is what is happening. we have now shifted to the asian region and we are going to have of our military forces in that area, 40% in the middle east, and i think that as

that happens we are going to find out new things and i think that china and their allies there are going to respond and push it out and i think that is what is happening right now. congressman duncan hunter, thank you for talking to our viewers. guest: thank you. ast: coming up next, spotlight on magazines continues with the new "politico," magazine. right after this newsbreak from c-span radio. reports in this hour that to ron says they are planning to pump as much oil as they can once sanctions on their crude exports are lifted, even if it causes rice is to slide. it will not happen before mid -- for to 14, of the comments from their oil minister reflect their determination to regain their role as a global oil power. private survey last month showed u.s. businesses adding the most jobs in a year

following big gains in manufacturing and construction. adp says that small companies and businesses added 200 and 50,000 jobs, larger employers added 180 4000 jobs in october, much stronger than their initial estimate. numbers cover only private businesses and often deferred to the more our answer government report that comes out on friday. as for the trade deficit, congress says that it fell in october, helped by an increase that has lifted america next words to an all-time high. the trade gap narrowed to 40.6 billion from september, boosting economic group -- growth because it showed american companies were earning more from sales overseas while u.s. consumers were buying fewer products from foreign competitors. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio.

>> c-span, we bring public affairs events from washington directly to you, putting you in congressional hearings, offering complete gavel-to-gavel coverage of the u.s. house. c-span, funded by your local cable or satellite provider, you can now watch us in high definition. [video clip] >> as we walk in there are all of these pamphlets about how the government is trying to take away your guns. obamas doing this, that, obamacare is terrible. those were the guys i wanted to talk to, they were the ones with the leaflets. they said -- yes, who are you. i said i am an academic, a researcher doing research on

these organizations, these ideas, trying to understand them, and i understand -- i studied men who believe this and a bunch of them looked at me suspiciously, asking the questions, and i said -- look, here is what i asked. i do not get it. here is my job. i want to understand how you guys see the world. i want to understand your worldview. look, you have not convinced me and i will not convince you, that is off the table, but what is on the table i want to understand why you think the way you do. mobility, racial and gender inequality, michael kimmel on the anger and rage of white men. part of booktv on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: on wednesdays during our last hour we take a look at a recent magazine article, part of our spotlight on magazine

series, today we are focused on the new politico magazine, there it is, first edition, susan is the editor-in-chief, john is with us to talk about that. let me begin with you, john, why did you decide to launch a magazine? you,: first of all, thank we are happy to be here to talk about this roger act and excited -- to have susan on our team. the reason we walk -- we launched the magazine was our larger mission, politico is about to turn seven years old and it has been our mission for some time that we want to be washington's dominant news coverage for national politics and policymaking here in washington. we want to be the dominant player with the vigorous competition day in and day out and in order to win that competition, we need to do a lot

of things well. his story when we started, back then seven years ago we were an organization of about 55 people and now we are an organization of 5500 people and a big one that i think we did well, we were really good at passing off the news as the place to go for palace intrigue and who was doing what to whom a couple of blocks am here on capitol hill. a certain type of story that until recently had been a bit outside our grasp, requiring extensive reporting and extensive writing, extensive editing and a lot of thought into how to publish it and present and get a big audience, which is not something we had been equipped to do and was something that as a journalist i was ambitious to do. in order to do it we had to add the capacity to do it. we had that previous track record of having those successful enterprises. we had spoken for long time in various ways about how to get

her in arm it. so, print is not dead? guest: it always sounds like a cliché, but the fact is that the cliché has a lot of validity to it. i think that anyone in journalism who is ambitious is agnostic, whether you are reading it in print, speaking of the great work on your computer, increasingly whether you are reading it on mobile devices, that is not the point. no one cares about that anymore. not readers, increasingly not advertisers. they want journalism with impact. they want distinctive content. there just is no market with the audience or on the business side for anything that is commodity journalism. they are not interested in that. they are interested in distinctive content and there are lots of ways to be distinctive. one of them is by being really smart and having

really deep, original reporting in a magazine format. historically that kind of journalism has found its home in print. we have a print edition six times a year, but we also have a as a platform for argument, opinion, and more ambitious enterprise journalism, which is what counts, we deliver the goods on the content, everything in our experience indicates that the audience will and that specifically the advertisers will be there. host: susan, taking a look at your first edition here, the daily frustration about the worst job in obama's washington, john, you said you had to have impact, but how do you have an impact in a magazine that comes out six times per year and is relevant as the cycle goes on on

a twitter pace throughout the day? guest: a great question, i think that locked in the cabinet is a great example of what we were trying to do. first of all, it was probably the longest article that we have ever run, and it was a big, ambitious piece of reporting. they interviewed more than 50 people, including numerous current and former cabinet secretaries, getting many of them on the record, doing a very stark portrait, really getting behind the scenes of the white house my coming through another vantage point, and i think that really speaks to the mission of what we are trying to do at a time when people perceive this as a hard white house to crack, that is what david sanger called it the other day for "the new york times." we have found a way to find something fresh and relevant about what the president did different magazine story that ran online in our new website

within the politico website, it was one of the most highly trafficked stories of the year, pace for one million this long for magazine article and it certainly challenges a lot of the incorrect conventional wisdom about what people will and will not read online and i think it certainly suggests to us the kind of ambition that we are aiming for, which is to say that you read through the clutter and recognize that you can live in the twitter news cycle, but you do not have to be a captive of the way, goody journalism tends to do well in the twitter world and beyond. we are not looking to unleash a flood of content. we understand that we are all drowning in information. we are connected and are a part which every day is pumping out tons of stories, videos, newsletters, this is a very robust journalistic ecosystem that already exist.

what is the mission of a new daily publication like this? it really is a daily publication . it is to offer you a curated space where smart editing and reporting has gone into it, we can stop and step back and say that these are four or five things that are relevant for you to consider in the news cycle today, perhaps looking outside of them. this is a cover story on the reported piece from iowa, from colorado, or a smart opinion piece from someone whose perspective matters. this is the kind of value we are trying to add. here is our new addition, again, to try to break through the twitter clutter rather than to break -- become part of the new -- part of the noise. host: let's get to the content. guest: it is true that on the web, there is clearly a certain market for the kind of nonsense

and frivolity and no one is immune to it. i think some of it is very perishable and weak, some of it is really fun. example thatolicy was fun, if she will forgive me, dogs and cats that look like vladimir putin. fine, that gets big traffic and that does not bother me, but i do respect someone, as i have committed my life to journalism, that the best journalism reads a big audience. piece could be our biggest of the year with enormous traffic and access. there is a market at both ends of the food chain and it is really important. the future of our business and profession depends on being able to connect with the audience. let's take this into the content of the cover story that we saw on the news this morning, saying that someone needed to be held accountable for what andened with healthcare.gov

democrats are calling on the administration and the closest allies are calling on the administration to fire someone. what is it like to be a cabinet secretary in the obama administration? to sign up for that duty is to by definition sign up for a certain amount of frustration and disappointment, particularly if you are one of those cabinet officers who believed the storyline that barack obama worked hard to perpetrate at the beginning that this was going to be a team of rivals, that he had been captivated by the doris kearns goodwin book on lincoln and was talking in ways where it felt like it could be a revival of a cabinet-based government. if so it would have been a departure from the trend of the last 50 years and which power has been increasingly centralized. it turned out he didn't have in mind a departure, in fact it is the most centralized to my mind

west wing since the nixon years. his new chief of staff has tried to moderate that little bit, trying to make the cabinet , but theeel more reality to make clear is that they are not invested, that they have autonomy and everything the west wing does not care about. if it is important they do not have uptown -- autonomy with young political aides dictating to cabinet members and in several cases cabinet members who have a significant amount of elective experience of their own and substantial achievements. those are the talking points from the west wing political game. i think that some cabinet members, glenn made clear, learned to deal with this frustration and in their own targeted ways pushed back against it more effectively than others. i think that others have just had a more unhappy time.

there is a quote in the piece from ray lahood, who said we are marginalized until the you know what hits the fan. if your question is did the president rely a lot on his cabinet group of advisors? he did not. that sums up the it was a palpable disdain. it was not just that they were left to do their own thing, but a sense that politics ruled in the white house because the first mission of a first-term president is to become a second term president and that was, i think, the orientation of how the west wing was structured in that first term. there was a real disdain for those folks. steven chu was the energy secretary, a nobel prize-winning physicist, brilliant by all , and the opening

anecdote of the story basically shows how the aides to president obama considered him literally a political idiot and would not even let him talk on his expertise about climate change because they were so concerned about how disruptive you would be. i think that is the tension inherent in the conflict playing out right now over health care. at the end of the piece we get in a bid to the travails of kathleen sebelius, who had more or less several years of quiet fire, manyw under calling for her to resign as a result of the botched rollout of obamacare, but i think you have to look at what was the message she was getting from the white house as this white house -- as this website was being played out. was she empowered to do that? tom daschle was going to be the secretary of health and human services and as was pointed out in the piece, he was very canny

and when he was going to hit, he specifically negotiated for an office in the west wing and status as a senior advisor. his nomination was derailed because of an unrelated tax think there was always a sense among political operatives that he had the kind of political juice that kathleen sebelius never did in a crisis. what do you make of robert gibbs saying in "the new york times" today saying that the president should send the message and fire someone? i certainly understand it and he has made that comment on other platforms and it does not surprise me. it is a classic conundrum that presidents face. , therebush cheney years

were certainly a lot of heads needing to roll in order to still the political waters. sometimes that works, and sometimes it just amounts to an acknowledgment of weakness. dick cheney would argue that if you threw them a scalp, the pack of wolves will get hungrier for another scalp." i am sure that that is the debate taking place in obama's mind right now, which is -- look , is this actually resolving anything? or is it simply acknowledging that we failed and emboldening the opposition? beyond the that politics, though, probably another thing that obama is thinking about that is the right thing to think about is the substance. ever mind politics, how did this happen? this was his signature domestic achievement. it was not a surprise, like hurricane katrina. it was a long planned event and

the rollout was disastrous. something went wrong and someone is responsible for that. is in theat someone west wing, deep in the bowels of health and human services, whether it is secretary sebelius, i do not understand the problems well enough to know. someone is accountable, i would say, ultimately, and that in my view the president has to bear some of that accountability. he came with a lack of administrative experience and uncertain times it was not a problem but this is one of those instances where someone with managerial instance -- instincts would not have allowed this. host: we have disagreement on twitter -- guest: i did not call for it. [laughter] viewerst's get our involved on the phone lines. john is up first in northbrook, illinois. hi, john.

caller: i wanted to ask -- one of my favorite parts about the politico website is that they have a fact check section. my question was -- how do they choose which facts to check? i do not know if they were able to hear the previous guest, but your website is one of the only places you can go to see an analysis of things that politicians say and have someone look at it for veracity. host: john? guest: thank you, caller, for reading politico, it is great to hear someone say that our work is valuable. we work hard at it and have a lot of fun doing it. we try to make the instinct for fact checking and accountability an element of every story. for news organizations, reasons i understand, sort of make it a feature, gimmicks, graphics, whatever, thumbs-up,

thumbs down, nose is getting longer or shorter, and that is a clever way for some people to do it, but we made the decision not to do it that way, we wanted to integrate it into our coverage as a matter of routine. if something is misleading or so.e, we try to say in that sense i think we have to have confidence as journalists to be liberated from the journalistic conventions of x and y. we can say reporting that there is a factual answer, it is raining. i encourage reporters to do that. yes, we are fair and there are two sides to it, but there are also factual truths and i think we believe it is an important part of our mission. back to the cover story with this tweet -- these are partisan times

and i think that the one thing that is surprising to me, coming back to the world of politics after the last five years as the editor of "foreign policy " is how supercharge this topic is. so important, what john said. we are there to do independent reporting. i hope that callers, viewers, and readers can look at it for what it is. it is an important part of the documentary record, i think, and it is interesting to hear what these cabinet members have to say and their perspective on the white house. what does it mean? about the chinese, when asked to them i, nixon said -- we are still waiting to see how the french revolution turns out. we are still waiting to see how

the obama administration turns out. host: houston, texas, independent caller. caller: yes, hi, how are you all today? host: go ahead. caller: are you all ever going to print anything good about obama? we have done more than you all have given him credit for. when we had bush in, there was comparison to the return of tax companies with individuals paying taxes, a lot of them had confrontation and too many people getting into office are not represented in the areas that they are elected to represent. do you go me ask you, to politico.com? caller: yes. host: and you think they have a bias? caller: yes. they do not print anything that is not the whole truth.

not: i believe that that is an, that is dan from washington, texas, thate, is dan from washington d c. host: do you get that a lot? we.c-span.org we -- guest: do, and i do not accept it. i think that if you read "politico," if you see the political leaders that recover we do it from multiple angles. sundays are good, some are bad, some are positive, others go in the negative, that is just the nature of journalism. we are committed to fairness, but if you are coming from the perspective of partisan -- i do theyriticize partisan,

make the world go around in washington, but if you come from that position it often looks like you are playing patty cake with a president, a republican caller might say. that is what democrats said during the bush years, that we were soft. it is not that the criticism is never accurate, but it is, i think, criticism is also really incomplete and does not reflect an actual understanding of the record. host: james tweets -- susan, what is your role in this administration? guest: there is a widespread belief that valerie jarrett is an advising counselor to the president. in the coverage of locked in the cabinet, glenn recounted a very interesting situation where valerie jarrett is a key ally of eric holder and the two of them

have not only a professional relationship, but are close personally with the first family in ways that have clearly affected the dynamic of how obama deals with his top advisers in the white house and out. believe that she became known to some in the cabinet as eric's appeals court, because when there were issues of dispute between holder and the staff at times, he was appealing either directly to obama over dinner or some other social occasion or going to valerie. who is the president closest to today, john harris? guest: i would have to speculate that in terms of the intersection between his political and personal life, it is valerie jarrett, who we were just talking about. i do not know that she is the most influential and policy, that we do clearly have ever been's that she is.

i am struck by what i read in "politico," elsewhere, about the rising influence of denis mcdonough. he is clearly someone who the president has a personal affinity with. that denisis notable mcdonough's skill has risen as a stack -- staff person. not someone who necessarily had a background as a principal in the way that obama had with rahm emanuel, or even bill daley, obama seems comfortable with people who are ultimately loyal staff people. i think that denis mcdonough is clearly in a position of influence. i will say that when you talk about the pack of wolves calling for resignations, there are people there who say -- wait a minute, if this administration is run by the west wing, the

person who is the chief of staff of the west wing should be held accountable. again, to be clear, i am not making judgments about whether or not anyone should be fired or who should be fired, but denis mcdonough is clearly also carrying some of the burden of being responsible for this and fixing it. host: this from the website for politico -- host: rose, hello. caller: looks like john harris watched the brian lamb interview with the bush chief of staff. i have a couple of things to say here. first of all, when was the last time that media did some self reflecting? cbs news and what they have done? and no one needs to hold -- chief of staff should be held accountable.

greta has asked i do not know how many times for kathleen sebelius to be fired, yet she ignores all of it. remember the census bill? in 2009 from the harris corporation out of texas? remember the air force debacle? nothing to show? is on the website, today, folks. the website is working. nothing to show, greta. no substance, greta. nothing to show, greta. host: we got your point. pat, texas. hello,pan.org -- caller: my thought, last week, when president obama kept repeating things like -- you can keep your dr., this whole scenario, he kept repeating it over and over

and i had thought -- i had always thought of him as the president of the united states, who could think alert late, but when he kept saying that it was almost like someone hypnotize, it occurred to me that this just came to my thoughts, the whole group that got into the white house may be using him as the mouthpiece for the whole group. and they would never have gotten into the what -- the white house without someone as articulate as president obama, which he is. host: pat, who is the whole group? caller: a group of progressives who wanted into the white house and they wanted to be in it, regardless of whether they could get elected or not, but president obama seemed like a good candidate to be their mouthpiece. that is kind of what he is acting like.

fireds why no one can get because they are in charge and he is not. that occurred to me as a possibility. can we talk about the cabinet secretaries and the power and influence that they have? guest: there is a long-term trend of centralization, including the extreme if ecology we have in confirming for any job. there are 200 senior administration officials right now who are waiting for confirmation from the senate that they have not yet approved. think about this, the chief of staff of the white house does not need to be confirmed, he serves at the pleasure of the president, so there are many even structural reasons as opposed to just the president's personal preference for why power resides in this place. what is the structure of this?

are we not going to face a lot more challenges like this? media organizations are going to need to figure out how to operate in a much more digital area where we are connected to people with a conversation that is wholly outside their experience. i think that this points out in the same way that perhaps the edward snowden disclosures pointed out that we are entering a whole new era of government and our government is still very much built on a 20th century model. john harris, does this cabinet in its relationship with the president differ that much from previous presidents? guest: that is a good question. there in they regardingsidency obama, and not just obama, but

the print covered, all the recent precedents, it is a degree of personal connection that a president feels. is that personal connection, there is the possibility of a relationship that is more like a west wing relationship rather than a cabinet. tim geithner had a pretty rough time at the start of his term as treasury secretary, but at the end they had a relationship where obama really relied on him and he did not have a sense that he was dealing with the treasury bold, p, s,ort of felt like he was dealing with tim, i guy that he trusts. the west wing constantly, probably as much as , ands across the street other people have not had that relationship.

i think it will be interesting when some of these people release their books. secretary gates is writing his memoir, what is he going to say about his relationship with obama? leon panetta? what is he going to say? neither ofnse that them did, in fact, have that degree of personal connection with the president. you can see their effectiveness in their view. gates book is supposed to come out in january and we reported a piece that he worked for both george w. bush and barack obama, even comparing him unfavorably in some respects the bush, which i think will be an eye-catching statement on the part of the and widely respected with national security professionals and republican who agreed to serve in his cabinet.

host: wharton, virginia, democratic caller. caller: how is everyone? host: fine, thanks. caller: number one, i did not believe that the rollout of healthcare.gov did not have a lot of problems, but think it has been way overblown. in terms of concrete numbers i bet you'll see -- you know what, we have a problem, but it was not the unmitigated disaster that so many people and most republicans have described it as , the effect on the percentage of the population being less than what they might have you believe. the next thing is instead of republicans jumping up and down and talking about how you can keep your health care plan if , building up the advances of those who lost in his interview

the president said he did not take over the insurance company, that they were making decisions to pay for these plans and there was nothing in the law that said they had to do that. in essence, that promise has been cap. i think that that is an important thing that is totally missed by the reporters, the media, and potentially missed by the republicans out there. will leave it there at have john harris respond to the call. guest: one point that i agree with, another that i do not. the point i agree with is that the success or failure, long- term of the affordable care act will not rise or fall on the website. if amazon can do it, southwest airlines can do it, we can have in it -- a website that works.

we are getting closer to that goal. it will be about whether it expandingobjective of coverage in a way that is not objective to people. website isn on the alternately seen as a more marginal issue. cancellations, the law did contemplate the plans that were not grandfathers that had changes and people migrating into these in 2010, those were expected to be canceled and while that was an unfortunate result of the policy , it was the express aim of the policy. they wanted people out of those low-cost, low coverage plans precisely so that they could go into more expensive plans that would provide the revenue to accomplish the other goals, coverage for other people who are older, therefore more expensive.

that is the idea behind the affordable care act. you expand your pool of people who are not currently covered, this would in fact pay for the expensive part. back to the cover story, what is his relationship with kathleen sebelius like? good-span.org -- guest: question, my guess is not super close. in her memoir, condoleezza rice recounts that great memoir where she is secretary and bob gates is the secretary of success and a nice, middle east gentleman -- whop and gates says is that? mikeays, sir, that is lemon, our secretary of health and human services. some of these guys do not get a

lot of face time. host: this tweet from ron -- interesting, i am not sure that that proves his case, if you will. john kerry has been -- has appeared to have been given a very wide leash. it is a little bit hard to say, he has been a very active secretary of state so far. most experts think that there is very little chance of a real breakthrough in the middle east and he is now dealing with the headache of getting an arrangement for a long-term force to remain behind in afghanistan. hamid karzai is proving to be a difficult actor. john kerry is out there and it would probably be impossible to micromanage him given the issues he has on his portfolio right now. i believe the president

made the decision to not go to war with him without consulting secretary of state? guest: that was documented well elsewhere, remember obama made this dramatic decision that he would intervene in syria in order to respond to the chemical weapons from the assad regime. he cameery last minute back in and set -- guys, we are going to change course and go to congress for authorization. john kerry and chuck hagel, by all accounts, were not there. denis mcdonough is going to confirm that. they were informed later that evening by telephone call. in fact john kerry said the last thing that happened before that evening, the walk on the white house lawn, was the impassioned john kerry speech in favor of military intervention.

host: mary, fairfax, virginia. hi.er: i never saw the congress so divided, republicans and democrats. is quite the saga, the republicans and the d party [indiscernible] after my divorce i had two full- time jobs, emergency letter for 18 [indiscernible] without medical insurance in tovate, you will not be able call 911. people do not realize that , it is a obama with horrible

information in the state of california on their own website. california republicans are sending people to a website that does not necessarily help them with navigating healthcare.gov, but on the larger point of politics and poll numbers, the affordable care act, healthcare.gov, what is happening with the president inside the white house as they look at his poll numbers? they areuest: recognizing that this issue, if not reframed in public perception, has the potential to define his second term in a really adverse way. we are not going to submit to that willingly, so we are seeing an aggressive campaign just underway now to get the emphasis

and remindblems people that the benefits of the affordable care act are for people. the caller and others are trying to resell the bill. host: we will have to leave it there, the house is coming in for their legislative session. viewers interested in the magazine, go to politico.com/magazine, follow the month twitter, thank you very much both of you for being here. appreciate it. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] and now live coverage of the house. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] 's room, washington, d.c., december 4, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable paul cook to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. boehner, n a. speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for mornin